In which we offer PR help to the Catholic Church

Pope Prada I meets Cardinal Pedobear

The Catholic Church is in a bit of hot water as of late, what with the whole 'raping kids and not doing anything about it' scandal. From revelations that the church refused to do anything to a man who molested 200 deaf kids, to revelations that the Pope himself resisted action against pedophile priests citing "the good of the universal church", accusations that you've "killed the church", inaction in other child rape cases, to threats of legal prosecution against the church, stripping of papal immunity in the UK, to the imminent buddy cop team-up and arrest of the Pope by rogue cops Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins, it seems the Pope is in for a rough couple of months... followed by a rough eternity in one of nine circles.

So seeing as he's in a spot of trouble, we figured that The TB Public Relations Conglomerate are the obvious ones to give him advice on how to proceed and provide critiques of their recent media strategies and statements. First, my credentials: I was born on Good Friday and thus am probably the resurrected Messiah, I have been to or seen a church within the last decade, and can remember several instances and interactions with priests where I wasn't raped. Satisfied?

Onward with a critical review of current Vatican media strategies. Remember, this is for you own benefit, Benedict.

Bill Donohue, President of the Catholic League.

"The Times continues to editorialize about the "pedophilia crisis,: when all along it's been a homosexual crisis."... “It’s not a pedophilia” because “most of the victims were post pubescent,” as old as 12 or 13 years of age. Anything older than that is the fault of gays."

Nicely deflected. Not only is it an overarching gay conspiracy, but it isn't pedophilia, because the priests were merely raping 12 and 13 year olds. It's practically not a crime then. Still, some might not be swayed by the logic of that argument, so you might want to emphasize how raping kids once they hit their teens is practically a commandment. Plus, you referred to the New York Times as "The Times" and not "The Jew York Times". It seems like you were attempting a full triple twisting back crazy and pulled out and only singled it. We're going to have to deduct points for mild sanity in between blaming gays, parents, and everyone but the priests or the church for it. Practice the full crazy and get back out on that horse.

Grosseto Bishop Giacomo Babini

A website quoted Giacomo Babini, the emeritus bishop of Grosseto, as saying he believed a "Zionist attack" was behind the criticism, considering how "powerful and refined" the criticism is. ... Allegedly speaking to the Catholic website Pontifex, Babini, 81, was quoted as saying: "They do not want the church, they are its natural enemies. Deep down, historically speaking, the Jews are God killers."

Nicely played. The controversy so much isn't child rape, church negligence, and cover-ups, no. The controversy is how the Jewish run media is coordinating coverage of these legitimate claims of abuse and accusations of church inaction/malfeasance. This is the kind of advanced blame shifting and Jew baiting that one can only learn from a lifetime in the Church. Take notes, Mr. Donohue. Do be careful about trying to ascribe conspiracies, Jewish or otherwise, to this scandal. It has the danger of making people thing of other conspiracies. Like a conspiracy to cover up sexual abuse of children over a period of decades by a central religious authority.

Cardinal Angelo Sodano, during an Easter Mass at the Vatican.

Sodano's praise for Benedict as well as the church's 400,000 priests worldwide cranked up a vigorous campaign by the Holy See to counter what it calls a "vile" smear operation orchestrated by anti-Vatican media aimed at weakening the papacy and its moral authority. ... "Holy Father, on your side are the people of God, who do not allow themselves to be influenced by the petty gossip of the moment, by the trials which sometimes buffet the community of believers," Sodano said.

Again, nicely played by a high church muckity muck. Glibly reducing credible accusations and investigations, teary confessions, and tacit admission from the church that these accusations are true and that they saw no need to punish guilty priests further as "vile smears" and "petty gossip" is always the right track when discussing facts. Though I would not that your choice of venue, the Easter Mass at the Vatican, does smack a little of "preaching to the converted". It might be the textbook definition. Try to get a few feet outside of the Vatican next time. Also, embracing the Pope immediately afterward might not have been the best idea. If charges are brought that incident could make you an accessory to a crime.

Writer Matt Taibbi

The Catholic Church is a Criminal Enterprise.

This may be true but it is not helpful to the cause to point this out.

Vienna's Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn

Vienna's Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn, speaking of Benedict's long years as head of a Vatican office that investigates abuse, said the future pope "had a very clear line of not covering up but clearing up." ... "I admit that I often feel a sense of injustice these days. Why is the church being excoriated? Isn't there also abuse elsewhere?

Ahh, nicely done. When in doubt, state the exact opposite of everything that the media is revealing about Pope Benedict's actions while in charge of disciplining priests. Acknowledging someone else's reality is the first step towards losing an argument. Which is why I'm more disappointed in the second statement. Sure, the "everyone else is raping kids and covering it up, we aren't the only ones" defense looks sound on paper and is a real winner in terms of public support, but you acknowledging the media narrative and also tacitly admitting that priests rape kids and the church covers it up. Which is bad. The admitting it, I mean.

Cardinal William Levada, head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

"I am not proud of America's newspaper of record, The New York Times, as a paragon of fairness."

Yes! Question the source. Just how reliable is one of the world's most reliable papers anyway? Though in the Times defense they are just passing on the accusation of 200 deaf boys, not making the accusations themselves. So the question is: do you want to question the credibility of 200 deaf children and wage a PR battle against them? The answer might seem like an obvious yes, but keep in mind there is a lot of sympathy on their side. After all, they were raped over a series of decades and nothing was done about it.

Anthony Fisher, bishop of Parramatta

''Last century we tried godlessness on a grand scale and the effects were devastating,'' he said. ''Nazism, Stalinism, Pol-Pottery, mass murder and broken relationships: all promoted by state-imposed atheism or culture-insinuated secularism.''

Nicely pointed out. Where would we be without the Catholic Church? What if we were all atheists? What would we be getting up to if we rejected the teaching of the church? Probably something awful like raping kids and covering it up. I can't bear to think of that reality.

An unsigned editorial from the Vatican

[it accused] the NY Times of willfully ignoring the "truth" of Ratzinger/Benedict's record and of attempting "to instrumentalize, without any foundation in fact, horrible episodes and sorrowful events uncovered in some cases from decades ago." The media, it continued, showed a "despicable intent of attacking, at whatever cost, Benedict XVI and his closest collaborators."

That's right, not only is this really only an issue that the Times is dragging up, this all happened decades ago. Who can remember what happened last week, let alone decades ago? The past isn't important or legally actionable. Though again, try to refrain from alleging a conspiracy or using words like collaborators. It tends to make people think a group of people within the church, including the Pope, might have "collaborated" on trying to cover up abuse cases. Best not mention that kind of thing at all. Bonus points for not signing the editorial. That takes bravery.

New York Times Op-Ed Columnist, Ross Douthat

In reality, the scandal implicates left and right alike. The permissive sexual culture that prevailed everywhere, seminaries included, during the silly season of the ’70s deserves a share of the blame, as does that era’s overemphasis on therapy.

Yes, blame the left. It works well in American politics, why won't it help shield the church from rape allegations? I mean weren't these crimes the hallmark or leftist hippies and their 60's and 70's culture? What was it they said at Woodstock "Watch out for the brown acid and if you see a kid grab him and do whatever you want"? Wasn't Purple Haze about covering up abuse allegations? Still, while these are useful additions to the defense, they should not be made from the pages of the New York Times. Haven't you seen the attempts to demonize the Times and blame it for the scandal. Or should I say "scandal". If op-ed columns blaming hippies and saying the Pope shouldn't resign are coming from the Times then how is it an effective demonization tool? It isn't. Shape up.

So there, I hope that helped out with the Catholic Church's efforts to blame everyone else. I hope that these tips and messaging strategies will provide useful when attempting to pretend that credible stories, abuse allegations, evidence, and paper trails leading to the Pope don't mean anything. But I want you to remember the keys to this strategy: don't ever admit you did anything wrong (infallibility), don't ever apologize, don't ever attempt to punish or give a stern talking to any accused priests, don't ever appear to have a shred of human compassion, ethics, morality, or empathy, above all think of yourselves, and protect the Pope at all costs to your credibility and religion.

You stick to that plan and soon you'll have completely eradicated Christianity from the earth. That is your goal, right? If it isn't I'm going to have to change my advice.

No, kill grandma

From Dick Armey's Freedom Works, the same conglomeration that brought you the Tea Parties, the Tea Baggers, and other such expressions of "grassroots protests", comes the latest inept salvo in the war against health care: Don't Kill Grandma.com. Their message? Don't kill grandma.....dot com. No, they would instead prefer to kill the health reform bill, which we all know will result in the violent murder of everyone's elderly relatives.

Ok, first off, what is with every right wing group using Monty Python clips now? First Chris Christie did it, now Freedom Works. What is it about left wing absurdist satire that so appeals to the right wing "grassroots" organizer? What I'm saying is: stop tainting the things I like or it's going to get violent in here.

Secondly: how come they're ignoring the wishes of the elderly who want the government to violently and brutally put them down without any remorse, pity, or mercy? What about those of us who would like to see grandma murdered in exchange for cheaper health care? As in every debate, we're cruelly pushed to the sidelines by the decency police.

Sadly, we here at TB Industries lack the means to start up our own fake grassroots protests and are much, much too lazy to try and start a real one. But for any left wing cranks with money (George Soros?) or billionaires with an abiding love for killing the elderly (George Soros?), we'd just like to point out that Kill Grandma.com , Off Gramps For the Greater Good.com, This Is the Way They'd Want to Die.com are all available, as well as their .org and .net equivalents. All I'm saying is post up a couple Python clips, add in a few testimonials of the elderly who want to be shotgunned by Barack Hussein Obama, stage a completely corporate backed protest mach on Washington, and we can finally swing this debate back to where we want it: murdering grandmothers. It's for the greater good.

Suggestions and advice

Wheelchair-Bound Woman Shouted Down At New Jersey Health Care Town Hall

A new low for these meetings may have been set when the crowd shouted down a wheelchair-bound woman with "two incurable auto-immune diseases" who had the gall to ask a question.

Steele Dismisses Woman Whose Mother Died Of Cancer

Duzak stood up and interrupted Steele, arguing that “everyone in this country should have access to good health care” and cited the case of her own mother who died of cancer six months ago because she couldn’t afford her prescription chemotherapy medications. The audience applauded her.

Steele responded by chastising Duzak and accusing her of pulling antics to get on TV. “So people go out to town halls, they go to the community, and they’re like this. (SHAKES ARMS) It makes for great TV. You’ll probably make it tonight. Enjoy it.”

GOP congresswoman tells uninsured constituent to ‘be a grown up’ and get insurance

At a recent town hall meeting, a 27-year old uninsured waitress named Elizabeth Smith asked Rep. Lynn Jenkins (R-KS) why as a working mother she can’t “get an affordable option” for health care. According to the AP, Smith’s 2-1/2-year-old son “hasn’t been to a doctor in 21 months, except for emergency room visits for ear infections, because she can’t afford either insurance or a doctor’s visit.” When Smith asked her question, Jenkins criticized creating “a government-run program” and said that she advocated tax credits so people like Smith could “go be a grown-up and go buy the insurance“

You know I'm no great fan of the GOP and the Teabaggers, but let me just offer one word of advice: if you wish for people to see you as anything other than big business stooges working against the interests of the American people and spreading lunatic fringe conspiracy theories in an effort to support your corporate masters, it's probably best to actually pretend to have some minor level of concern for the sick people and poor people who actually have real concerns about health care costs and accessibility. I know you really don't care, but pretend...for the children.

Though what do I know, maybe mocking cancer patients and wheelchair bound women is a brilliant strategy. I do know disrespecting the poor and working class has worked wonders. Still do it for my sake. If you aren't out there laughing at cancer patients it makes me seem less like I'm arguing again cartoonish caricatures of 1920's black mustached, caped, 'tying a woman to the train tracks' villains and more like I'm actually arguing against people with legitimate ideas. I know it isn't true, but let me have that illusion. So I can pretend this is still a functioning, rational country.

Suggestions and advice

Far be it from me to help and advise the the coal and oil industries along with their fellow climate change opposition, but I'm not sure you should be making statements like this:

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, trying to ward off potentially sweeping federal emissions regulations, is pushing the Environmental Protection Agency to hold a rare public hearing on the scientific evidence for man-made climate change.

Chamber officials say it would be "the Scopes monkey trial of the 21st century" -- complete with witnesses, cross-examinations and a judge who would rule, essentially, on whether humans are warming the planet to dangerous effect.

"It would be evolution versus creationism," said William Kovacs, the chamber's senior vice president for environment, technology and regulatory affairs. "It would be the science of climate change on trial."

Oh, you mean the trial where a teacher was charged for a crime by the religious forces in his state because he had the nerve to teach factual scientific theory instead of the Bible? That Scopes Monkey Trial? The one that's sort of viewed as a blight on education and science in this country? Recent evolution trials haven't gone over too well for the God side either. I'm not sure that's the kind of thing you want to emulate. Maybe they all agree, because rest assured, the Chamber of Commerce was backing away from the statement the second they realized what had been said.

My “Scopes monkey” analogy was inappropriate and detracted from my ability to effectively convey the Chamber’s position on this important issue.

No, that isn't quite right Mr. Kovacs. This isn't a case where you said something that's dishonest that you need to back away from it, this is a case where you said something so truthful you need to back away from it. The Scopes Monkey Trial is the perfect analogy you want to make. You wish to challenge overwhelming and nearly unified scientific consensus on the basis that it isn't what your bosses and the corporations you represent want to hear.

I believe the phrases you're looking for are "Global warming is just a theory", "the scientific consensus isn't fully formed", "sure there's global warming but it isn't man made and we can't do anything about it", "...uh sunspots something something", "it was cold out today, how can the planet be warming if it was cold out", or "Al Gore is fat." Come now, surely you know better than to clearly state what you believe and revel in scientific ignorance."New Scopes Monkey Trial". Rookie mistake.

He's so helpful at reducing panic

God love Joe Biden. When sent out to reassure people the the flupocalypse wasn't about to kill all their weak children and elderly relatives, he proceed to decide that Barry calmed too many people down last night and it was up to old Joe to get them properly panicked about their imminent death.

Vice President Joe Biden says he's advising his own family to avoid "confined places" -- to stay off commercial airlines and even subways -- because of the new swine flu.

Biden said Thursday if one person sneezes on a confined aircraft, "it goes all the way through the aircraft." Going beyond official advice from the federal government, Biden said of his family's personal precautions: "That's me."

Asked on NBC's "Today" show whether the government should close the border with Mexico to try to slow the spread of the flu, Biden says health authorities advise that would be impractical because the swine flu has already spread to the U.S. and several other nations. Instead, he says people should focus on confined places where the flu could spread quickly, such as airplanes, malls and classrooms.

"I'll tell you what Matt Lauer, all public transportation and places where people congregate are flu incubating death traps where you are 100% guaranteed to catch swine flu. No Biden will die like a dog in one of those disease pits. In fact, I'm advising the American populace start wearing full protective gear and gasmasks when they go out to prevent the spread. Also, I would advise that you shoot first and ask questions later when encountering anyone of the Mexican or 'Tejano' persuasion. Or anyone who looks too tan. They're carriers. Eliminate them. One shot to the head, that's the only way to kill them. But, you know, don't panic or anything. We've got it all under control."

Joe, what would we do without you? Besides not break into a panic when we're indoors or on some form of transportation.

Broken News: Experts agree: "America had to end sometime. Why not now?"

NEW YORK—Today the UN Commission on Depressing Conclusions, a panel of scholars and experts from all relevant fields assembled to analyze the effects of the economic crisis on America, released the results of their study, It Had to Happen Sometime: Coming to Grips With the End of America.

The analysis, compiled over five months and featuring the combined analytical weight of over 40 top scientists, engineers, economists, retired officials, and celebrities who pretend to care about issues, argues that America was always going to come to some grim end and that this relatively slow-moving financial crisis gives us all a chance to walk away from our country with the least potential collateral damage to human society.

Excerpt from the study's conclusion reveal a sobering, yet somehow lighthearted and encouraging assessment:

In respect to the alarming figures shown in section 47-11a and the projections in section 7B-1137, it is the considered opinion of this commission that the citizens of the United States should recognize that the weakened state of their economy and moral/ethical standing in the world has provided them with the ideal opportunity to disband.

The US was always going to collapse under its own weight and we feel that by deciding to disband voluntarily instead of being torn apart by economics, racial strife, government conspiracy, Mexican invasion, or any number of scenarios involving genetically modified dinosaurs, robots, aliens, or clone armies resulting in complete economical and societal collapse will not only benefit the well being, health, and survival rates of the citizens of the United States, but will also negate any danger of said conflicts and collapse affecting the surrounding globe.

The report ended with a cryptic and ghoulish, “You’re going to fail and take us all with you. Get out now before you devour us all.”

While no concrete plan was given for the dispersal of the world’s only superpower into the wind, several suggestions have been floated. One proposal called for America to be broken up into anywhere from 7 to 243 separate countries, grand duchies, fiefdoms, and anarcho-syndicalist communes with a promise never to reform. While others suggested America’s land be divided between Canada and Mexico while citizens were given a choice to join any other country in the world where they would be given new identities and new regionally appropriate surnames.

“Look, we’re just looking out for the planet as a whole,” remarked Dr. John LaFleur, statistician and Chief Overlord of Harsh Numbers and Unflinching Realities on the commission, at a press conference following the release of the report. “If the United States as a whole is dragged down by this economic mess, or really by the hundreds of other potential messes they will inevitably create, it will bring down the UK, Germany, China, Russia, and spread to the rest of the world. At the very least the US needs to be broken into more manageable pieces.”

“Look at Iceland,” he continued, motioning his hand with the derogatory ‘wank-off’ gesture. “They’re using seashells and old Viking tales as currency now and that’s just from the beginnings of this economic crisis. God help the rest of us if this gets worse."

"Now what would happen if, say, the new, smaller economy of the Islamic Republic of Montana went in the toilet, or the Commonwealth of Pennsyltucky was hit by a meteor, or people stopped believing in Narniabama? Less global calamity. Smaller stakes, smaller consequences. It wouldn't fuck with my shit over in Switzerland, that’s for sure.”

He ended screaming “We don’t all have to be taken down with you!!!!!”

Other committee members present were quick to voice their support, noting that if America was to take this opportunity to sacrifice their nationhood now that it would dramatically reduce the number to die of starvation, radiation, exposure, civil war, fascist rule or whatever things would almost certainly occur if America chose to let the passage of time decide its fate.

“Just think, there’d be no awkward situation where you had to face down your brother on a battlefield because you took opposing sides in the civil war,” observed Tomas von Gelt, a committee member and Oxford professor specializing in grimly ironic, personally emotional wartime conflicts. “Plus you would also reduce the number of children whose deaths you had to avenge against the multitude of different splinter groups that caused them. Time-wise it makes sense. Just think about it.”

The commission hopes that America will look at the report, listen to their considered words, digest its limited options, decide to listen to reason and do the responsible thing. The UN has dangled the possibility of a swank farewell party for the country if America decides to end itself on its own terms and provided the country survives until the date of the party.

Satire 101 for the New Yorker

Just a tip, New Yorker. If you're going to run a satirical cover stereotyping the nation's first black candidate for President and his wife as every nasty right wing slander that's been thrown at them, replete with Osama bin Laden picture on the wall, with an article entitled 'The Politics of Fear', you might want to put the tagline 'The Politics of Fear' somewhere in giant letters on the cover. So people can overtly tell it's satire about how he's been attacked, not another one worrying if he's some muslim sleeper agent or crazy black separatist (articles which have actually appeared in major newspapers.) Some people were going to be offended no matter what. I think some of the reaction is majorly overblown. But it's best in these situations to make your intent as explicit as possible so no one can easily mistake it.

Another tip, for satire to be effective you need to be showing exactly who the satire is specifically being pointed at. No such thing is being done here. There is no joke on the people who spread such lies, just a drawing depicting everything they say. In a way you've just created the most easily spreadable version of those right wing memes.

Third, you had to explain it. It's defacto bad satire then.

Try harder next time. Just trying to help.